PASSED: For the Detained and Convicted

[United Dependencies]

alot of use of the word adequate. That leaves many parts open to interpretation which will lead to confusion no doubt.

[Greenlandic People]

While my nation appreciates the aims behind this resolution, we feel that it is a little to vague for us to support. As other ambassadors have noted, clauses denoting "adequate meals" and "adequate exercise" leave it entirely up to the prison to define, presenting the possibility that "adequate" could be determined to be, in fact, far less than adequate, in order to torture prisoners or save money. So, it's a no from me I'm afraid.

Yours,

Sigismund Ibsen
World Assembly Delegate of Lavinium

[Archonis-Thay]

f.
(i) shall be permitted at least one hour of outside exercise daily;
(ii) shall be permitted exercise time inside as requested for any reason, weather or otherwise;

This strikes me as giving them the right to say "I wana go inside, and you've got no choice but to let me".
In my nation the prision officers tell the inmates where to go, not the other way around. Is that what it says or am I reading it incorrectly.

[Glomeland]

f.
(i) shall be permitted at least one hour of outside exercise daily;
(ii) shall be permitted exercise time inside as requested for any reason, weather or otherwise;

This strikes me as giving them the right to say "I wana go inside, and you've got no choice but to let me".
In my nation the prision officers tell the inmates where to go, not the other way around. Is that what it says or am I reading it incorrectly.

It seems to say they are entitled to one hour of outside exercise per day and as much indoor exercise as they want.

Eyðvør Eilifsdóttir
World Assembly Ambassador
The Republic of Glomeland

[Northern Fury]

As a new small nation, whose civil rights record is not exemplary, The Protectorate of Northern Fury wholeheartedly endorses the spirit of this Resolution. We are committed to the improvement of human rights and the treatment of detainees/prisoners in our country.

However, we cannot endorse the Resolution in its current state.

The following issues concern Northern Fury:

1. We would like a more concrete definition wherever the word "adequate" is used. For example, "adequate meal" could possibly be defined as "a meal sufficient for the Detainee to maintain a healthy body weight".

2. Organization. As worded, legal conflicts may arise, and nations may attempt to circumvent the resolution. However, such conflict is inherent in any document such as this, we believe some of these conflicts may be worked out prior to passing the resolution.

Defines:
1. “Detainees” as any person(s) held in captivity by authorities accused of a crime(s), prior to conviction.
2. “Convicts” as any person(s) accused of a crime and convicted in a court of law.
3. "adequate meal" as ___

1. That the detained:
a. are considered the accused until proven guilty;
b. shall be informed as to the nature of the offense;
c. shall be entitled to protection by the state from outside and inside threats.
d. (i)if held for more than 6 hours per day (or equivalent),
(i) shall be fed an adequate meal, AND
(ii) shall be fed at minimum two adequate meals per day;

2. That the convicted:
a. (i)if sentenced to prison,
(i)be given accommodations of a reasonable comfort level, AND
(ii) shall be placed in an area of adequate security level for the offense;
b. shall be fed at minimum two adequate meals per day;
c. shall have visitation rights;
d. shall be entitled to protection from inside threats;
e. shall not be subject to cruel and unusual treatment, so as not to cause physical or mental harm;
f. (i) shall be permitted at least one hour of outside exercise daily;
(ii) shall be permitted exercise time inside as requested for any reason, weather or otherwise;
g. (i) if misbehaved the convicted, (i) may be punished and temporarily lose rights listed as (c)and (f)and (g)** for an adequate an amount of time in proportion to the seriousness of the misbehavior time as given as determined by a prison board or equivalent;
(ii) shall have more time added to their sentence if misconduct is a felony or of a serious nature.

** We respectfully point out that clause (g) does not contain any rights which could be suspended from misbehavior, and believe that the revocation of the rights in clause (f) would be appropriately revoked for misbehavior.

We have nothing by admiration for this Assembly and all of its delegates, and we would like to specifically thank R539 and Meekinos for putting forth such an important issue for our consideration.

Respectfully declining to endorse this resolution in its current form, but endorsing its spirit,

Brandiglet
Regent of Northern Fury

[Qumkent]

This resolution is well meaning tripe, a glaring example of the worst laxity in drafting processes. Naturally we will be voting against this statute and we urge all other members states to do so also.


Yours,

[Doctor Cyclops]

The Domain treats crime as an illness, and seeks rehabilitation rather than punishment. Still, the Domain is concerned by the language of this proposal as it assumes all nations cleave to an archaic form of criminal justice.

What effect, if any, would this proposal have on a nation like the Domain, which claims no prisons and no prisoners?

Additionally, the vague language reeks of optionality. What does "adequate" even mean within the context of the resolution? Is it left up to the individual nation? If so, you enter into optionality.

[Leftmen]

I will not vote for this.So here it is,plain and simple.1st change for me to give you my vote is to give the prisoners 3 adequate meals if detained and convicted.2nd,Doctor Cyclops has a good point.What does adequate mean?In my country,Adequate means close to luxury.While in your country,it could mean 2 meals a day!!!!Wouldn't they get hungry and complain?And,I don't don't know whate you call"adequate"living standards.Unless this is rewritten if it does not pass,my decision is no,I'm out.

[Flims]

In flims we give people three meals a day

[Archonis-Thay]

f.
(i) shall be permitted at least one hour of outside exercise daily;
(ii) shall be permitted exercise time inside as requested for any reason, weather or otherwise;

This strikes me as giving them the right to say "I wana go inside, and you've got no choice but to let me".
In my nation the prision officers tell the inmates where to go, not the other way around. Is that what it says or am I reading it incorrectly.

It seems to say they are entitled to one hour of outside exercise per day and as much indoor exercise as they want.

Eyðvør Eilifsdóttir
World Assembly Ambassador
The Republic of Glomeland

Either way I dislike the idea. There are much more productive things they could be doing other than making themselves able to beat up a lone prision officer.

In the rare event I need prisions again this "Resolution" will be counter-productive, I will be voting against it. It had the right idea at heart, but doesn't follow that idea to the end.

[Ostronopolis]

2121 Hours - Ostronopolis Ambassador To The World Assembly - Margret Brown

"I find this resolution provides for a far too leftist and lenient nature upon the individual convicted fairly in the court of law, for example in the Federal Republic of Ostronopolis a convict, is subject to what would be classified as penal slavery, as well as the fact that private corporations, which of course must abide by basic constitutional law, have often contributed and saved the Federal Government billions, possibly even trillions of Federal Credits by implementing these procedures."

"I'm sorry, but until serious reform and consideration is done to that of the section of the convicted criminals section is in adherence with not only ours, but also other state's right to treat their CONVICTED criminals as they see fit, this Republic will NOT condone nor vote in favor of this resolution which is clearly, and undeniably biased in nature to that of the center-left."

[Phoenix Rock]

As I understand it, the use of the word "adequate" in regards to quality of meal and security is acceptable, despite it's ambiguity and toothlessness.

If a nation already has laws pertaining to the minimum nutritional value in a prison meal, the meals are no doubt considered "adequate" by those who would put this resolution into effect. The same holds true for security.

Nations without laws to these effects would have to put some legislation into place regarding both issues, which would at least be a positive first step.

I would admit, however, that I find the wording of Clause f. (ii) to be disastrously unclear and that of Clause g. (i) to be inexcusably poor.


-Alexander Radcliffe, Head of Foreign Affairs-

[Altani WA Mission]

As I understand it, the use of the word "adequate" in regards to quality of meal and security is acceptable, despite it's ambiguity and toothlessness.

We are forced to disagree. Ambiguity and toothless is rarely desirable in legislation, especially when said ambiguity and toothless is related to a major operative clause.

In addition, we have other concerns. It appears to us that this legislation, if passed, would require almost unlimited visitation rights for prisoners. The Altani Federation houses many prisoners that are so dangerous that allowing them visitors, other than lawyers and others in very carefully controlled circumstances, would pose a serious threat to the outside world (terrorists, for example). This is a hugely problematic matter as far as we are concerned.

That, and the fact that the resolution up for vote is just so ambiguous as to be ineffective, causes us to vote no.

-Irina Misheli, Ambassador

[Helghast Krieg]

This is proposterous. Murderers and Rapists do not deserve comfort or deserve to have our hard working honest citizens pay thousands of dollars to support them with state of the art "Hotel Treatment".


In response to this, the Empire has begun publicly executing criminals convicted of first degree offenses, such as murder, rape, treason, terrorism, and other serious acts of criminality.

[TDSJRB]

As pointed out there is a lot of room for improvement to this proposal. Most of the issues are also covered by previous measures already passed.

While we agree with the basic tenants of the proposed resolution, we will have to urge a no vote.

We feel that the treatment of prisoner reflects on a society. Treatment and rehab are to us top priorities, this proposal does nothing to address these additional issues.

Perhaps we could support a future resolution that does not duplicate previous laws and addresses other issues.

[Ten-Pin Bowlers]

We, the people of Ten-Pin Bowlers, find this proposal to be good in spirit but horrible in execution. The use of the word adaquete is ambigous in nature and confusing in meaning. What exactly do you define as "adaquete"? What is adaquete for one man is not for the next. Adaquete living conditions for most Ten-Pin Bowlers would include running water, painted walls, large windows, close proximity to a bowling alley and of cause a tv. For a prison, close approximity to anything is a horrible idea, as is large windows. Both of these things make escape a lot easier. In addition, since prison sentences are shorter in Ten-Pin Bowlers due to the pyschological nature of our prisons, painted walls and television would also be something that we would find inappropriate for a prison.

Letting the prisoners exercise inside whenever they want to also sounds like a horrible idea. Imagine, for example, that it is 1 o'clock in the morning. A prisoner could wake up and demand to be allowed to exercise, and we would be forced to let them if this resolution passes. While across the hours of 10pm to 7am Ten Pin-Bowlers prisons run with minimal staff, we would be forced to hire more guards in the event of everyone wanting to exercise. Surely this would not be good from an economic standpoint?

We also disagree with what would be considered an adaquete meal. Here in Ten-Pin Bowlers we have a large contingent of vegetarians and non-vegetarians, and what is considered adaquete for one group would not be adaquete for another. Let's just say that the evening meal that we would be forced to feed to our prisoners was to be a couple of slices of roast beef, gravy and a couple of potatoes. Firstly, that meal would not be adaquete for the vegetarians would it? Surely we can't start forcing people to eat meat if they are vegetarian, just like we would not expect a non-vegetarian to eat nothing but vegetables. Secondly, is that meal even adaquete for the non-vegetarians? Some of them may not like Roast beef, some may not like Potatoes. A cannibal, of which we have very few but then again, some societys have many, would proabably not consider any meal other than human flesh adaquete. Would we have to start catering to them?

Another problem with this resolution is the meals themselves. At no point does it say, at least as far as we can tell, that any time has to pass between providing the first meal and the second meal. If this resolution passes I could theoretically provide both meals at the same time. Surely that would not be good for the prisoners?

It is for these reasons, as well as several other issues we have with this resolution, that we must respectfully vote against it. We agree with the spirit and the idea, but not the execution.

Respectfully yours,
Lord Cranker,
Ten-Pin Bowlers delegate to the World Assembley.

OOC: Whoo! first post! Also, I realise I mispelt adequate as adaquete...

[DiCinnoa]

2121 Hours - Ostronopolis Ambassador To The World Assembly - Margret Brown

"I find this resolution provides for a far too leftist and lenient nature upon the individual convicted fairly in the court of law, for example in the Federal Republic of Ostronopolis a convict, is subject to what would be classified as penal slavery, as well as the fact that private corporations, which of course must abide by basic constitutional law, have often contributed and saved the Federal Government billions, possibly even trillions of Federal Credits by implementing these procedures."

"I'm sorry, but until serious reform and consideration is done to that of the section of the convicted criminals section is in adherence with not only ours, but also other state's right to treat their CONVICTED criminals as they see fit, this Republic will NOT condone nor vote in favor of this resolution which is clearly, and undeniably biased in nature to that of the center-left."

i agree

[Leuzinger]

Why don't you proof read this, correct all of the errors and then resubmit it. It is a good plan but the way you have it worded is terrible.
How can you vote for something if it is not written correctly

[R539]

How can all you say this when you didn't bother to help me draft it (with the exception of a few)? This thread has been here for almost a month and no one took the time to look it up. I made the post about needing 6 more approvals on my second draft, which failed to make quorum by 2 approvals. I then changed it to the current version which made it, but still everyone whines about it...

[Qumkent]

How can all you say this when you didn't bother to help me draft it (with the exception of a few)? This thread has been here for almost a month and no one took the time to look it up. I made the post about needing 6 more approvals on my second draft, which failed to make quorum by 2 approvals. I then changed it to the current version which made it, but still everyone whines about it...

Your Excellency it took us six months to draft and redraft the Charter of Civil Rights, and we had the benefit of a prior anti-discrimination resolution to work from. Four weeks is not a particularly long time to spend trying to write good legislation, and since your Excellency did nothing to seek the input and assistance of any experienced delegations it can hardly be claimed that every opportunity for improvement was sought can it ?


Yours,

[Gobbannium]

How can all you say this when you didn't bother to help me draft it (with the exception of a few)? This thread has been here for almost a month and no one took the time to look it up. I made the post about needing 6 more approvals on my second draft, which failed to make quorum by 2 approvals. I then changed it to the current version which made it, but still everyone whines about it...

We must respectfully disagree. We critiqued this proposal over two weeks ago on our return to this chamber after an absence of several months, while it was at quorum but still easily removed from public embarrassment. That the respected ambassador did not choose to read or acknowledge our comments is hardly our fault.

[DiCinnoa]

How can all you say this when you didn't bother to help me draft it (with the exception of a few)? This thread has been here for almost a month and no one took the time to look it up. I made the post about needing 6 more approvals on my second draft, which failed to make quorum by 2 approvals. I then changed it to the current version which made it, but still everyone whines about it...

regardless of how many others helped the bill was still submitted in its current form, which doesn't seem to satisfy alot of member nations

[Glomeland]

How can all you say this when you didn't bother to help me draft it (with the exception of a few)? This thread has been here for almost a month and no one took the time to look it up. I made the post about needing 6 more approvals on my second draft, which failed to make quorum by 2 approvals. I then changed it to the current version which made it, but still everyone whines about it...

Surely you are not claiming that your fellow ambassadors are to blame for this proposal? It says "Proposed by: R539". It also says "Co-Author: Meekinos", which I find a bit odd since the transcript of the drafting discussions does not indicate any significant contributions from the Meekinos delegation.

Eyðvør Eilifsdóttir
World Assembly Ambassador
The Republic of Glomeland

[Tjennewell]

We like the spirit of the proposal, but think that it still needs work. Some parts still show apparent errors in the text:

g. (i) if misbehaved, may be punished and temporarily lose rights listed as (c) and (g) for an adequate time as given by a prison board or equivalent;

We assume it wasn't (g) that was meant there.

Tjennewell urges the author to pull this proposal and resubmit it once it is fixed and the good ideas brought forward in this discussion are implemented.

[Flibbleites]

We like the spirit of the proposal, but think that it still needs work. Some parts still show apparent errors in the text:

g. (i) if misbehaved, may be punished and temporarily lose rights listed as (c) and (g) for an adequate time as given by a prison board or equivalent;

We assume it wasn't (g) that was meant there.

Tjennewell urges the author to pull this proposal and resubmit it once it is fixed and the good ideas brought forward in this discussion are implemented.

Unfortunately, at this point the proposal can't be pulled.

Bob Flibble
WA Representative